This chart is from a CATO poll where 89% of folks 65+ favor raising taxes on younger workers to protect SS benefits rather than cutting them. Given the breakdown of other age groups, taxes are most likely going to be raised.

Based on latest projection, the SS trust fund will be depleted one year earlier: fourth quarter of 2032. The money is all gone anyway, but that is the first year that SS will have a deficit and pay out more than it has taken in during it's existence.

89% of senior citizens support raising taxes on younger workers to maintain their benefits.

The median primary voter is 65. pic.twitter.com/y81V5vb0Yc

— Russ Greene (@GreenPlusAnE) June 16, 2026

If they wait about five years to implement this and guarantee that people already receiving benefits will not see them reduced, I am good with this.

Tea Party said:

---

How selfish and way to screw over their kids and grandkids generations.

For how great out culture is as a whole and our idea of governing system, we sure do have some serious warts within our culture.

---

Every age bracket except the youngest one favors increasing taxes. And that one is almost an even split.

It wont pay out more than it takes in. The pay outs will suddenly rake a 20-25% cut as it become pay-go.

No one wants to deal with this.

The options are increase payroll taxes (companies and workers)
Change the salary cap (this probably has the highest chance)
Increase the age of retirement. People are living longer and historically 50% of retirement age population passed away before they ever collected a dollar.
Means test who is eligible to receive payments. Thus will largely be fought in court though.

For everyone else, you should not be factoring in SS as part of your retirement plan.

UTExan said:

---

How about no.
I would be fine in capping SS payouts at $3,000 per month instead of the absurd top end payment of $5,181 because the country is never going to do away with SS.
But SS was never intended to be a sole source of retirement income; it was intended to stave off starvation.

---

But, but, billionnaires, fascism, and muh feeelz

This is the only way to keep this Ponzi scheme going.

Over_ed said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

This chart is from a CATO poll where 89% of folks 65+ favor raising taxes on younger workers to protect SS benefits rather than cutting them. Given the breakdown of other age groups, taxes are most likely going to be raised.

Based on latest projection, the SS trust fund will be depleted one year earlier: fourth quarter of 2032. The money is all gone anyway, but that is the first year that SS will have a deficit and pay out more than it has taken in during it's existence.

89% of senior citizens support raising taxes on younger workers to maintain their benefits.

The median primary voter is 65. pic.twitter.com/y81V5vb0Yc

— Russ Greene (@GreenPlusAnE) June 16, 2026

---

SS has always been a federal welfare program. Yeah they try to hide it, for instance by saying higher income people cost the system more (ignoring time value of money), trust funds, deficits...

All a bunch of BS. But everyone who has been paying in expects (and deserves imo) to get what they were promised. And it appears most agree.

You can change the system, but then you have to have people continue to pay in, knowing that they will not receive benefits. That is a very hard sell, and diametrically opposed to the fiction used to create it. Tell a Gen Z that they need to contribute both ends of FICA etc and receive nothing for it. Good luck, btw.

Never should have started at all, just another way to make citizens dependent on government.

---

Yep welfare by government. But instead of earmarking that money to be specifically used to pay SS, like the good government that we have, that pot of money was "borrowed" from to pay for this or that.

If anyone ever had the guts to comb through that account with the federal government, I don't doubt we would have some sort of revolution. The government has stolen from everyone.

Logos Stick said:

---

This chart is from a CATO poll where 89% of folks 65+ favor raising taxes on younger workers to protect SS benefits rather than cutting them. Given the breakdown of other age groups, taxes are most likely going to be raised.

Based on latest projection, the SS trust fund will be depleted one year earlier: fourth quarter of 2032. The money is all gone anyway, but that is the first year that SS will have a deficit and pay out more than it has taken in during it's existence.

89% of senior citizens support raising taxes on younger workers to maintain their benefits.

The median primary voter is 65. pic.twitter.com/y81V5vb0Yc

— Russ Greene (@GreenPlusAnE) June 16, 2026

---

That's a pretty limited chart considering it is only taking two options into account. There are plenty of other options that can be implemented in order to bolster Social Security. Such as:

1. Increase or eliminate the income cap on contributing to Social Security, which currently stands at $184,500. According to AI, it would eliminate more than half of the current Social Security shortfall. If nothing else was done, it would extend the Social Security solvency date by over two decades.

2. As has happened a couple of times before, increase the Full Retirement Age for those currently in their 20's/30's to 68 years of age. Kids in their 20's/30's don't believe there will be any benefit at all for them, so delaying it another year with a continued chance to get Social Security, will make swallowing that pill a little easiier.

3. Decrease the annual growth of waiting to take Social Security beyond Full Retirement Age, which currently stands at 8%/year. I am aware of no product on the open market that will grow an annuity by 8%/year by waiting to exercise the draw date. Reducing that number to say, 6% will have a significant impact.

It just seems to me that there's some low-hanging fruit for legislators to explore before they look at reducing benefits for current recipients or increasing the percentage Social Security Tax. (Note: Listing of the above options does not reflect my opinion on any of said options.)

If you raise them now, you will just have to raise them again. It will be a never ending cycle. Need to cut the waste.

Stupid questions get stupid answers. The correct question is, how does the government cut waste and stop spending on stupid stuff to continue SS.

If the federal government were to pay back all the IOU's that it has taken from the SS account, it would have plenty of money. The problem is the government spending addiction.

Taxpayers and those that pay no taxes want "freebies" from the government causing the government to spend more than it collects in taxes. The SS fund has been robbed to the point that the SS tax is just an additional income tax for the general fund.

Those who want more socialism and bigger government of all ages are at fault. This problem extends across all political parties.

SS has been a Ponzi scheme since the beginning. Stealing its funds to pay for the general government budget (thanks, Bill Clinton), just makes it worse.
Eventually the bill will come due. SS going broke is just a symptom of the bigger issue.

Note that many who are retiring soon didn't expect SS to still be around at this point. It has been on the verge of collapse for at least 40 years.

Increase the age limit and add means testing so we don't have people using SS to gold plate their early retirement. It is completely unfair to saddle those of us still producing with higher taxes, no hope for SS ourselves, and a ballooning debt. But boomers will get theirs, regardless of the burden left to their kids and grandkids. I suspect their belief is that they will have more money to leave to their heirs, so at least the only ones they truly care about will be fine.

I'm close to the point where I will be drawing my Social Security. I've saved well and it will essentially be "play money" for my retirement. It seems like every generation has concerns on whether or not they will ever receive the benefits (dare I say "entitlements") that they afforded via their contribution to the biggest Ponzi scheme in the world. Perhaps, if we didn't give away billions to people is ****hole nations, we'd have enough to pay our people first. #americafirst

I'm only one citizen and am nearing retirement so I've been paying in (mostly at max levels) for almost 40 years…. I have planned for my retirement not counting on SS. I would forego all my benefits tomorrow if this stupid experiment of the federal govt taxing citizens in the guise of protecting sr citizens would end. This Ponzi scheme sucks and has just resulted in more fraud and more wealth redistribution

How about cutting spending. 5% per year sounds like a good plan. Not high enough to cause job market panic, yet compounded yearly would help not only the deficit but also government efficiency.

UTExan said:

---

How about no.
I would be fine in capping SS payouts at $3,000 per month instead of the absurd top end payment of $5,181 because the country is never going to do away with SS.
But SS was never intended to be a sole source of retirement income; it was intended to stave off starvation.

---

So you don't think those that have paid deserve what the policy promised? You only mentioned capped and not a guaranteed minimum for those that have paid maybe 40 plus years. Agree that SS was never intended to be a sole source of income when created. But what would you tell those that have paid in over the years and now face growing costs like Texas property tax that has increased approximately 400% over the last 30 years? You telling the 80-90 year olds go get a job?